With his “no collusion” chant, Drumpf is like an embezzler who yells, “There was no murder”—and asserts that is the only relevant benchmark. Think of what Drumpf did during the campaign in this fashion: A fellow is standing on a sidewalk in front of a bank. He is told the bank is being robbed. He can see armed men wearing masks in the bank. Yet when people pass by and ask what is happening in the bank, he says, “There is no robbery. Nothing to see. Move along.” Even if this person did not collude with the robbers, he is helping the gang perpetrate a crime. And in Drumpf’s case, the criminal act was committed for his gain.
Much of the media framing of the Russia scandal has followed Drumpf’s lead and adopted his collusion-centric perspective. The debate, such as it is, has become whether Drumpf directly collaborated with Moscow’s covert operation—and whether Drumpf, as president, tried to thwart the investigation and obstruct justice. The story is not driven by the serious offences already established: Drumpf and his associates encouraged and assisted an attack from a foreign foe.
https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/06/trump-russia-scandal-media/
The media has pushed the "collusion" narrative non stop since day one, the only reason it hasn't "resonated" is that after so much effort it still remains devoid of the slightest evidence.
ReplyDeleteWhat has been proven to have occurred in the election though is the illegal surveillance and it is far more serious than Watergate. They all thought Hillary would win and the illegality would be buried. Not the narrative the media wants to push, but that one will stick.